Cargando…

Double-Docking Technique, an Optimized Process for Intrathoracic Esophagogastrostomy in Robot-Assisted Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy

BACKGROUND: Though robotic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy has been increasingly applied, intrathoracic esophagogastrostomy is still a technical barrier. In this retrospective study, we introduced a double-docking technique for intrathoracic esophagogastrostomy to optimize surgical exposure and facilitate...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wang, Fuqiang, Zhang, Hanlu, Qiu, Guanghao, Wang, Zihao, Li, Zhiyang, Wang, Yun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8978993/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35388362
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2022.811835
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Though robotic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy has been increasingly applied, intrathoracic esophagogastrostomy is still a technical barrier. In this retrospective study, we introduced a double-docking technique for intrathoracic esophagogastrostomy to optimize surgical exposure and facilitate intrathoracic anastomosis. Moreover, we compared the clinical outcomes between the double-docking technique and anastomosis with a single-docking procedure in robotic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. METHODS: From March 2017 to September 2020, the clinical data of 68 patients who underwent robotic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy were reviewed, including 23 patients who underwent the double-docking technique (double-docking group) and 45 patients who underwent single-docking robotic esophagectomy (single-docking group). All patients were diagnosed with esophageal cancer or gastro-esophageal junction by biopsy before surgery. The technical details of the double-docking technique are described in this article. RESULTS: There was no difference in the patient demographics data between the two groups. The median surgical time in the double-docking group was slightly shorter than in the classic group without statistical difference (380 vs. 395 min, p = 0.368). In the double-docking group, the median blood loss was 90 mL, the median number of lymph nodes harvested was 17, and the R0 resection rates were 100% (23/23). There were no differences in the surgical outcomes between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our experience, the double-docking technique provides good surgical exposure when fashioning anastomosis, and such a technique does not increase the surgical time. Therefore, we believe that the double-docking technique is a safe and effective method for intrathoracic esophagogastrostomy while providing good exposure and ensuring the convenience and reliability of intrathoracic anastomosis.